Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Epic Games to pay $245M for tricking users into making unwanted charges

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 318 posts

Re: Epic Games to pay $245M for tricking users into making unwanted charges

#41

Post by hunter2_ »

JohnFen wrote: post #27
bluetidepro wrote: post #5

> Additionally, the order bars Epic from blocking consumers from accessing their accounts for disputing unauthorized charges. This could be bigger than people realize. This is very common in many tech companies like Uber/Doordash/Sony/etc. where if you do a chargeback, you often get blacklisted on their service. It would be amazing if this starts to end this practice, and you can actually have authority to get your m…

> if you do a chargeback, you often get blacklisted on their service. Although, to be honest, if a problem has deteriorated to the point where I need to do a chargeback, I've already written off doing any further business with that company anyway.

For many, that depends entirely on the availability of alternatives. With duopolies like Uber/Lyft, you survive after one kill and then you're done. Amazon hardly has a direct competitor. For merchants with plenty of direct competitors, I agree with you.

Re: Epic Games to pay $245M for tricking users into making unwanted charges

#42

Post by jdquey »

xahrepap wrote: post #16
bluetidepro wrote: post #5

> Additionally, the order bars Epic from blocking consumers from accessing their accounts for disputing unauthorized charges. This could be bigger than people realize. This is very common in many tech companies like Uber/Doordash/Sony/etc. where if you do a chargeback, you often get blacklisted on their service. It would be amazing if this starts to end this practice, and you can actually have authority to get your m…

I wonder if CC companies have a way of punishing companies for this. At least in my circles, the sense of security from having charge-backs is a huge reason a lot of people even use CCs. If Visa told Uber/Epic/etc "you can't use our network if you're going to undermine our features". Though it would smell a bit like a giant squashing ants... anti-trust and all that. :/ So maybe government getting a handle on Dark Pat…

> I wonder if CC companies have a way of punishing companies for this.

Yes, if they get enough people doing chargebacks. The challenge is most of these big co's seem to be in the "too big to punish" camp. This is both you need a large amount of chargebacks and perhaps they may not want to fire the companies (though this is speculative).

> At least in my circles, the sense of security from having charge-backs is a huge reason a lot of people even use CCs.

I'm with you that this is still important and valuable because many companies don't blacklist you. Furthermore I'd rather have that protection and testing a service which could be no service than no service at all.

Re: Epic Games to pay $245M for tricking users into making unwanted charges

#43

Post by afterburner »

bluetidepro wrote: post #5

> Additionally, the order bars Epic from blocking consumers from accessing their accounts for disputing unauthorized charges. This could be bigger than people realize. This is very common in many tech companies like Uber/Doordash/Sony/etc. where if you do a chargeback, you often get blacklisted on their service. It would be amazing if this starts to end this practice, and you can actually have authority to get your m…

This is just common in general. Nobody that you chargeback is going to want your business again. It's just that tech companies usually hold something you want (your account) effectively hostage, whereas a restaurant or whatever you can just stop going to. This does make it worse.

Re: Epic Games to pay $245M for tricking users into making unwanted charges

#44

Post by JohnFen »

bluetidepro wrote: post #31
JohnFen wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you do a chargeback, you often get blacklisted on their service. Although, to be honest, if a problem has deteriorated to the point where I need to do a chargeback, I've already written off doing any further business with that company anyway.

Yes and no. Sometimes it's more grey than that in services like Uber or Doordash where it could be at the fault of one bad apple and not the company at a whole. Or as others said, sometimes you are at the mercy of losing a massive library of content if you get blacklisted like on Steam or Amazon, for example.

> it's more grey than that in services like Uber or Doordash

I understand this perspective, but my opinion is that the company running things is responsible for the people working under their banner. If the company doesn't make something right, that's on the company in the end regardless of who specifically did something wrong. So it doesn't look gray to me.

> sometimes you are at the mercy of losing a massive library of content

True, and that's a tough spot. Personally, that risk is why I never use a service that can put me in that sort of position. But I do understand that others may be willing to take this risk. It's still a risk, though, and I expect that the people who choose these sorts of services are aware of that and accept that they might lose.

Re: Epic Games to pay $245M for tricking users into making unwanted charges

#45

Post by vuln »

paulmd wrote: post #25
bluetidepro wrote: post #5

> Additionally, the order bars Epic from blocking consumers from accessing their accounts for disputing unauthorized charges. This could be bigger than people realize. This is very common in many tech companies like Uber/Doordash/Sony/etc. where if you do a chargeback, you often get blacklisted on their service. It would be amazing if this starts to end this practice, and you can actually have authority to get your m…

Came here to say this too. This just needs to be the rule generally. Steam and Amazon do the same thing - get hacked and get charged for some items, if you dispute the Steam charge you lose your $5000 account, that's not a fair playing field and effectively negates the protection offered by credit card networks. Hopefully steam resolves it, that's always the first line of defense, but if they don't, you still can't c…

You purchased _access_ to the media for as long as the company decides to host it. You don't physically own the media. Think of it as renting or a lease.

Re: Epic Games to pay $245M for tricking users into making unwanted charges

#46

Post by SkyBelow »

criley2 wrote: post #28
bluetidepro wrote: post #5

> Additionally, the order bars Epic from blocking consumers from accessing their accounts for disputing unauthorized charges. This could be bigger than people realize. This is very common in many tech companies like Uber/Doordash/Sony/etc. where if you do a chargeback, you often get blacklisted on their service. It would be amazing if this starts to end this practice, and you can actually have authority to get your m…

I don't think this concept will fly broadly in America, it violates the way the American constitution sets up private vs public. Forcing private businesses to do businesses with the public without discrimination is only allowed in certain cases. Are you open to the public, providing an important service? (Like taxi, hotel, etc?) Then you cannot discriminate. Are you not-essential, with limited rules based membership?…

The problem is that the businesses have made customer's ability to access their previous purchases dependent upon continuing to have a business relationship with the account. If, when closing the account, the business paid back full value for everything they were removing access to, the ruling might be different. But they aren't doing that.

If you are a business doing more normal business, selling something with no sort of required subscription, something the customer does not depend upon you for, then you are still free to stop doing business with them (minus a few cases related to protected classes).

Re: Epic Games to pay $245M for tricking users into making unwanted charges

#47

Post by spacemadness »

paulmd wrote: post #25
bluetidepro wrote: post #5

> Additionally, the order bars Epic from blocking consumers from accessing their accounts for disputing unauthorized charges. This could be bigger than people realize. This is very common in many tech companies like Uber/Doordash/Sony/etc. where if you do a chargeback, you often get blacklisted on their service. It would be amazing if this starts to end this practice, and you can actually have authority to get your m…

Came here to say this too. This just needs to be the rule generally. Steam and Amazon do the same thing - get hacked and get charged for some items, if you dispute the Steam charge you lose your $5000 account, that's not a fair playing field and effectively negates the protection offered by credit card networks. Hopefully steam resolves it, that's always the first line of defense, but if they don't, you still can't c…

I could see these being difficult logistical problems for companies but that gives them no right to socialize the problem by playing hardball and holding accounts hostage. That problem is in their domain to solve, and sorry that being a profitable business is tough but, again, solving this is not on the customer.

Re: Epic Games to pay $245M for tricking users into making unwanted charges

#48

Post by vuln »

ceejayoz wrote: post #18
bluetidepro wrote: post #5

> Additionally, the order bars Epic from blocking consumers from accessing their accounts for disputing unauthorized charges. This could be bigger than people realize. This is very common in many tech companies like Uber/Doordash/Sony/etc. where if you do a chargeback, you often get blacklisted on their service. It would be amazing if this starts to end this practice, and you can actually have authority to get your m…

I'd love to see this formalized as a rule/right. I essentially can't file a chargeback against Amazon or Steam, ever, because of the likely repercussions to the rest of my libraries there.

> my libraries

You may have curated but you do not own your library. You purchased _access_ to said library.

Re: Epic Games to pay $245M for tricking users into making unwanted charges

#50

Post by paulmd »

vuln wrote: post #45
paulmd wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Came here to say this too. This just needs to be the rule generally. Steam and Amazon do the same thing - get hacked and get charged for some items, if you dispute the Steam charge you lose your $5000 account, that's not a fair playing field and effectively negates the protection offered by credit card networks. Hopefully steam resolves it, that's always the first line of defense, but if they don't, you still can't c…

You purchased _access_ to the media for as long as the company decides to host it. You don't physically own the media. Think of it as renting or a lease.

That may be true, but the EU can simply outlaw those types of contractual arrangements going forward, and require that prior purchases be either defaulted into the new purchase arrangement or refunded.

Welcome to governments that are actually responsive to protecting their citizens. It doesn't have to be the way it is in the US with corporations holding all the cards, that's just regulatory capture in action.

That's how the EU works in general, the balance is shifted way towards consumer protections - even if companies don't like it, tough. You get a default 2 year warranty on everything, no questions asked, and if the items fails past that due to an inherent defect in design or manufacture, they have to replace it even if it's outside the warranty window. And that's just normal, that's how everything is expected to run. USB cables, charges, all that crap, the EU does what it thinks is best for its citizens' lives, and while specific things sometimes do go wrong, on net it's a massive benefit to everyone's quality of life.

Companies exist to serve us, folks, not the other way around. It doesn't have to be this way. "Oh we put something in the terms of service"? Yeah bullshit. Mandatory binding arbitration in your contract of adhesion? Arbitrate on deez nuts.

The US is completely obscene by the standards of the rest of the developed world.

Post reply on HN